• Resources are back! Use the menu in the main navbar. If you own a resource, please check it for formatting, icons, etc.

PF2 True Target (Spell)

gargoyleking

Explorer
I came on a spell that seemed a bit underpowered for it's level even with the most generous interpretation. Still, true Target is a 1 action spell and that is always nice to have in this system. The thing that bothers me, is it seems like it would buff the entire party's ability to attack the target. The problem though, is that the actual wording of the spell seems to limit the advantages it provides to the very next attack that anyone makes against it(Friend or foe).


The new True Strike spell by comparison is amazing. But that's only taking up a 1st level spell slot. And can't be countered by an enemy shaman throwing a rock at their bbeg.
 

CapnZapp

Adventurer
Not sure what point you're making?

I read True Target to be True Strike for an ally.

Actually, if you cast True Target and then yourself zap that target, I read it to be identical to True Strike. Which might not be the best use of a level 7 slot, replicating a level 1 spell...
 
Last edited:

gargoyleking

Explorer
(The first attack against the target.) So yes, I agree that it's intent was for at least one ally's use. But the wording is a fail. While it basically describes giving out all it's secrets of survival for the next round to everyone in range to do anything about it, only one attack gets the bonus. And any single one of your enemies could take the shot just to expend the utility of the spell.

"Oops, the goblin flunky stabbed it in the thigh gor 1d4-1 damage and now the spell's over."
 

CapnZapp

Adventurer
(The first attack against the target.) So yes, I agree that it's intent was for at least one ally's use. But the wording is a fail. While it basically describes giving out all it's secrets of survival for the next round to everyone in range to do anything about it, only one attack gets the bonus. And any single one of your enemies could take the shot just to expend the utility of the spell.

"Oops, the goblin flunky stabbed it in the thigh gor 1d4-1 damage and now the spell's over."
I believe the wording is immaculate. It's a True Strike, only not for yourself.

What you really want to say is that you don't like the spell.

PS. The goblin flunky likely is not your ally, unless he is, in which case you have only yourself to blame
 

gargoyleking

Explorer
Look, I've been gaming for decades now. I can read a rule with the best of them, and this spell is; one, very poorly balanced even if it gives the bonus to everyone in your party; and two, worded in such a way that only one attack will gain the advantage and the attack could come from anywhere, enemies included. This is prime errata bait. Assuming that Paizo recognizes the issue and takes steps to correct it.
 

Campbell

Relaxed Intensity
It was supposed to say their not the. Mark Seifter confirmed it on the Paizo boards. It's 7th level. It's supposed to be powerful. Accuracy boosters are extremely powerful in this game. Many martials have strong attacks they can use to capitalize on moments like that.
 

CapnZapp

Adventurer
Look, I've been gaming for decades now. I can read a rule with the best of them, and this spell is; one, very poorly balanced even if it gives the bonus to everyone in your party; and two, worded in such a way that only one attack will gain the advantage and the attack could come from anywhere, enemies included. This is prime errata bait. Assuming that Paizo recognizes the issue and takes steps to correct it.
What?

The only person here claiming it gives the bonus to everyone is you.

To be blunt: you are having problems caused by your own misreading of the spell.

I have repeatedly said it's True Strike for an ally. If you don't like that, fine, but please stop trying to claim it's badly worded when you can't make the words fit your misconception.

Thanks
 

gargoyleking

Explorer
You should try reading it for yourself if you're going to argue a point. In truth, no, it doesn't say anything about allies. The phrase used is 'Those around you'.
 

CapnZapp

Adventurer
My point is that not liking a spell is fine. Just don't attack the language as being unclear just because it doesn't do what you want it to do.

That is: if you think the spell is underpowered, say it is underpowered, not that it is unclear.

By the written text, it only applies to a single attack, and yes, that can be an enemy "stealing" it.

But not only is that cheesy as hell, it makes no sense.

In fact, the spell is crystal clear. There is no way to interpret it as giving more than a single attack, making it True Strike for allies.

If the devs have gone on record saying the spell will receive errata that's one thing. It still does not make the current wording unclear.
 

gargoyleking

Explorer
Okay, the more you talk, the more you piss ke off. Pay attention to what's going on and please, shut up if you don't have anything constructive to say.

It's already been determined that I was correct in my analysis and the wording is a typo.
 

Campbell

Relaxed Intensity
As written the confusion comes from the written summary in the spell list and the text of the spell. The rules language also conflicts with the first sentence which describes what is going on in the fiction when you cast the spell.

Summary said:
True Target: Make multiple attacks against a creature especially accurate.
Spell Text said:
You delve into the possible futures of the next few seconds to understand all the ways your target might avoid harm, then cast out a vision of that future to those around you. On the first attack roll made against the target during true target's duration, the attacker rolls twice and uses the better result. The attacker also ignores circumstance penalties to the attack roll and any flat check required due to the target being concealed or hidden.
 

gargoyleking

Explorer
Thanks, I missed the description part.

Anyways, I do think the spell needs a bit of rewording to become more clear. How about...

"Each creature who attacks the target gains the following benefits on their first attack against the target.
 
Last edited:

Advertisement

Top